LTA LTA40 02 S0261444807004144a
LTA LTA40 02 S0261444807004144a
LTA LTA40 02 S0261444807004144a
http://journals.cambridge.org/LTA
Additional services for Language
Teaching:
State-of-the-art article
Authentic materials and authenticity in foreign
language learning
Alex Gilmore Nottingham University, UK & Kansai Gaidai University, Japan
alexgilmore@mac.com
This article reviews some of the wide-ranging issues and
research surrounding authentic materials and authenticity
in foreign language learning. After a brief historical
overview and a discussion of some of the definitional
ambiguities associated with authenticity, the paper goes
on to discuss four important areas of concern: i) the
gap between authentic and textbook discourse; ii) the
English-as-a-world-language debate; iii) authenticity and
motivation; iv) text difficulty and task design and their
effects on language acquisition. The article concludes by
examining some of the reasons behind resistance to change
in curriculum and materials design and possible future
directions.
1. Historical overview
The use of authentic materials in foreign language
learning has a long history. Henry Sweet, for example,
who taught and wrote at the end of the nineteenth
century and is regarded as one of the first linguists,
made regular use of authentic texts in his books and
was well aware of their potential advantages over
contrived materials:
The great advantage of natural, idiomatic texts over artificial
methods or series is that they do justice to every feature of the
language . . . The artificial systems, on the other hand, tend to
cause incessant repetition of certain grammatical constructions,
certain elements of the vocabulary, certain combinations of words
to the almost total exclusion of others which are equally, or
perhaps even more, essential. (Sweet 1899: 177)
http://journals.cambridge.org
c 2007
97
IP address: 92.241.95.12
Alex Gilmore
authenticity should have in foreign language learning
in the future. This article attempts to do this although,
given the scale of the undertaking, some areas of
discussion are necessarily superficial.
2. Defining authenticity
There is a considerable range of meanings associated
with authenticity, and therefore it is little surprise
if the term remains ambiguous in most teachers
minds. What is more, it is impossible to engage
in a meaningful debate over the pros and cons of
authenticity until we agree on what we are talking
about. At least eight possible inter-related meanings
emerge from the literature. Authenticity relates to:
(i) the language produced by native speakers for
native speakers in a particular language community (Porter & Roberts 1981; Little, Devitt
& Singleton 1989);
(ii) the language produced by a real speaker/writer
for a real audience, conveying a real message
(Morrow 1977; Porter & Roberts 1981; Swaffar
1985; Nunan 1988/9; Benson & Voller 1997);
(iii) the qualities bestowed on a text by the receiver, in
that it is not seen as something inherent in a text
itself, but is imparted on it by the reader/listener
(Widdowson 1978/9; Breen 1985);
(iv) the interaction between students and teachers and
is a personal process of engagement (van Lier
1996: 128);
(v) the types of task chosen (Breen 1985; Bachman
1991; van Lier 1996; Benson & Voller 1997;
Lewkowicz 2000; Guariento & Morley 2001);
(vi) the social situation of the classroom (Breen 1985;
Arnold 1991; Lee 1995; Guariento & Morley
2001; Rost 2002);
(vii) assessment (Bachman 1991; Bachman & Palmer
1996; Lewkowicz 2000);
(viii) culture, and the ability to behave or think like a
target language group in order to be recognized
and validated by them (Kramsch 1998).
13): An authentic text is a stretch of real language, produced by a real speaker or writer for a real audience
and designed to convey a real message of some sort.
Using these criteria, it is possible to say whether a text
is authentic or not (within these terms) by referring
to the source of the discourse and the context of its
production. The concept also has validity since, as
Porter & Roberts (1981: 37) point out (referring
specifically to listening texts), native speakers are
usually able to identify authentic text with little hesitation and considerable accuracy. Furthermore, by
defining authenticity in this way, we are able to begin
identifying the surface features of authentic discourse
and evaluating to what extent contrived materials or
learner output resemble it (see, for example, Trickey
1988; Bachman & Palmer 1996; Gilmore 2004).
How far does this more specific definition of
authenticity take us? Not a great distance. Even if
we limit our description to real language from a real
speaker/writer for a real audience with a real message,
this still encompasses a huge amount of language variety. Graded teacher-talk in the classroom, motherese,
international business negotiations between nonnative speakers and scripted television soap operas
would all be classified as authentic. But all these types
of authentic input can be expected to have very
different surface discourse features, and some will
serve as better input to stimulate language acquisition
in our learners than others. Authenticity doesnt
necessarily mean good, just as contrivance doesnt
necessarily mean bad (Widdowson 1979, 2003;
Clarke 1989; Cook 2001). As Cook (1997) points
out, terms such as authentic, genuine, real or
natural and their opposites fake, unreal or contrived are emotionally loaded and indicate approval
or disapproval whilst remaining ill-defined. I would
argue that, from the classroom teachers perspective,
rather than chasing our tails in pointless debate
over authenticity versus contrivance, we should focus
instead on learning aims, or as Hutchinson & Waters
(1987: 159) call it, fitness to the learning purpose.
The key issue then becomes What are we trying to
achieve with classroom materials? A logical response
to this would be that the goal is to produce learners
who are able to communicate effectively in the target
language of a particular speech community, that is to
say, learners who are communicatively competent.
To reach this goal, I would suggest that teachers are
entitled to use any means at their disposal, regardless
of the provenance of the materials or tasks and their
relative authenticity or contrivance.
98
http://journals.cambridge.org
IP address: 92.241.95.12
Authenticity in FLL
http://journals.cambridge.org
IP address: 92.241.95.12
Alex Gilmore
account for pervasive features in spoken discourse
such as ellipsis or slots at the beginnings and
ends of clauses (heads and tails) for speaker
orientation/evaluation and stress the importance of
an interactive interpretation on verb-form choices
in real data. Hughes & McCarthy (1998) argue
that sentence-based grammars are inadequate to
explain speaker/writer choices at the discourse level.
They show, for example, how it, this and that,
which are normally not taught together in language
pedagogy, frequently operate as alternatives in real
discourse. Whereas it signals continued, ongoing
topics, this marks new or significant topics and
that has a distancing or marginalising function
(see also McCarthy & Carter 1994: 91). The
discourse grammar approach that they recommend
has important implications for the classroom because
it relies on learners being presented with longer
stretches of text in order to interpret grammar
choices made. Wray (2000) (but see also Willis 1990,
Lewis 1993, Aijmer 1996) focuses on the importance
of formulaic sequences (idioms, collocations and
sentence frames) in language learning, stating
that even proficient non-native learners have
difficulties distinguishing what is natural from what
is grammatically possible but non-idiomatic. She
blames this on the lack of natural language models
in the classroom (despite their common occurrence
in television and film) and on the problems teachers
have selecting the right formulaic sequences to
present, concluding that it seems difficult to match
in the classroom the real world experience of
language (ibid.: 468). Perhaps this difficulty can
most easily be overcome by presenting learners with
carefully selected authentic language to work with
in the classroom; at least until we understand more
about the processes involved in sounding idiomatic in
English. Basturkmen (2001) illustrates how learners
are often misled by descriptions of questioning found
in ELT materials and argues for authentic texts to
be used with higher-level learners to give more
realistic models. Shortall (2003) reports that the
emphasis in textbooks on adjectival comparatives and
superlatives underestimates the importance of nouns
+ more for comparing, as illustrated by frequency
data from the British National Corpus. Carter &
McCarthy (2003) illustrate, with spoken corpus data
from CANCODE, how E-language (the external
language of real-world communication) consistently
differs from I-language (the language of introspection
or Chomskys ideal speaker-listener). In spoken
language, question tags, relative clauses and subject
verb concord often fail to conform to prescriptive
descriptions. Their frequency data also highlight the
pervasiveness of words such as like, the morpheme
-ish, and response tokens such as right, which all
play an important affective role in discourse but are
rarely taught in ELT. These inadequacies in the way
that language is presented to learners in textbooks
100
http://journals.cambridge.org
IP address: 92.241.95.12
Authenticity in FLL
Wolfson data
26%
Wall examples
80%
41%
8%
33%
0%
(Bouton 1996: 17)
89.5% of interactions are symmetrical in the textbooks and this limits the examples of negotiation in
the scripts, since negotiation is more typical of asymmetrical relationships. Finally, she notes the very
low incidence of FTAs in the textbooks and, even
when they do occur, the learning opportunity for
facework they provide is rarely exploited. BardoviHarlig & Dornyei (1998) compared the ability of
ESL/EFL students to recognise grammatical and
pragmatic violations in 20 videotaped scenarios with
one of three conditions: with grammatical mistakes;
with pragmatic mistakes; with no mistakes. They
asked subjects to identify whether or not the scenarios
contained mistakes and, if they did, how serious they
were. While the ESL learners (studying English in
the United States) rated the pragmatic mistakes as
more serious than the grammatical ones, exactly the
opposite pattern was found with the EFL learners
(studying in Hungary and Italy). The authors explain
this greater pragmatic awareness in the ESL learners
as stemming from the quality of their experience with
the L2:
It seems likely, then, that the pragmatic awareness of the
ESL learners may have come from the friction of their
daily interactions: the pressure not only of making themselves
understood but also of establishing and maintaining smooth
relationships with NSs in the host environment. (ibid.: 253)
http://journals.cambridge.org
IP address: 92.241.95.12
Alex Gilmore
work by participants, and therefore also providing
the best model to develop this aspect of discourse
competence, is casual conversation but this is largely
ignored by textbooks, perhaps because it is seen as
unstructured and, as a result, unteachable (Eggins &
Slade 1997: 315). Language teaching materials tend
to concentrate on monologues or dialogues where
turn-taking is structured and predictable, with some
kind of transactional goal. More interactional, non
goal-oriented language, used to develop relationships,
is much less common and it is hardly surprising,
therefore, to find that learners experience more difficulties with this kind of talk. Belton (1988) found that
advanced Italian NNSs of English displayed virtually
native speaker competence on transactional tasks but
striking dissimilarities with native-speaker (NS) talk
on interactional tasks and blames this on the predominantly transactional input and tasks of EFL materials.
Authentic recordings of casual conversation are the
most likely source of useful models to illustrate how
proficient speakers effectively manage discourse and
build relationships, employing a range of strategies
such as recognising transition relevance places (TRPs)
where they can appropriately make a bid for the floor
(Sacks, Schegloff & Jefferson 1974), employing topic
shading to ensure that their turns are coherent with
preceding talk (Crow 1983; Bublitz 1988), making
subtle topical moves which move the conversation
in a direction to suit their own goals, using reactive
tokens to empathise (Clancy, Thompson, Suzuki &
Tao 1996) and discourse markers to signal how their
turns relate to the ongoing conversation (Schiffrin
1987; Carter & McCarthy 2006). Once learners are
aware of these strategies, they can practice using them
in their own conversations, even recording and transcribing their own discourse and comparing it with
NS samples effectively becoming mini conversational analysts themselves, something recommended
by a number of researchers (Brown & Yule 1983;
Willis & Willis 1996; Celce-Murcia & Olshtain 2000;
Schegloff et al. 2002; Wong 2002). The process of
transcribing speech is a critical step for exploitation
of spoken discourse in the classroom because it allows
us to freeze the interaction and highlight salient
features for the learners that would otherwise be lost
in the normal, transient flow of communication.
With respect to spoken genres in textbooks, a
number of problems exist, the first of which relates
to the range of genres illustrated. In a principled
approach, we would expect to see the relative
importance and frequency of generic types (for a
specific target context) reflected fairly in classroom
input, but this is often not the case. Eggins &
Slade (1997), for example, identified five common
generic types in their casual conversation data:
storytelling (narratives, anecdotes, exemplums and
recounts) (43.4%), observation/comment (19.75%),
opinion (16.8%), gossip (13.8%) and joke-telling
(6.3%). They claim that, despite the important role
102
http://journals.cambridge.org
IP address: 92.241.95.12
Authenticity in FLL
4. The English-as-a-world-language
debate
The spread of English around the world and its success
as the primary medium of global communication
has considerably complicated the issue of teaching
the language and the concept of authenticity in
the process. With its expansion across the globe,
English has naturally diversified into a proliferation
of forms, varying in pronunciation, intonation,
grammar, vocabulary, spelling and conventions of use,
as it has been adapted to suit new surroundings so that
it becomes ever more difficult to characterize in ways
103
http://journals.cambridge.org
IP address: 92.241.95.12
Alex Gilmore
that support the fiction of a simple, single language
(Strevens 1980: 79). An estimated one billion people
are learning English as a foreign language (Graddol
1997) and by 2010 it is predicted that there will
be 50% more speakers of English as a foreign
language than there are native speakers (Crystal
1997). Currently, it is believed that approximately
80% of English used worldwide does not involve
native speakers at all (Crystal ibid; Prodromou 1997).
All of this has led to doubts and anxieties among
professionals and the general public alike (Strevens
ibid.: 78) as the concepts of native speaker and
standard English become ever more difficult to pin
down (Carter & McCarthy 2003; Crystal 2003).
104
http://journals.cambridge.org
IP address: 92.241.95.12
Authenticity in FLL
However, this view has been challenged more recently for being rather patronizing, underestimating,
as it does, the non-native speakers ability to take from
the language materials only what they consider useful,
and to appropriate English for their own needs, or in
Kramsch & Sullivans (1996: 210) words, the unique
privilege of the NNS to poach on the so-called
authentic territory of others, and make the language
their own (see also Byram 1991; Bisong 1995;
Siegal 1996; Seidlhofer 1999; Gray 2000; Carter &
McCarthy 2003). The desire to impose restrictions
on cultural input from abroad is, in any case, more
likely to emanate from political institutions within
the country seeking to maintain control over the
population (see McVeigh 2002 for a discussion of
the Japanese context). Materials based on the C1
do, however, allow learners to practise explaining
about their country in English (Cortazzi & Jin
1999) and, because they start from familiar content,
provide greater support, allowing for more top-down
processing (Richards 1990) which may be particularly
beneficial at lower levels of proficiency. Furthermore,
in Widdowsons (2003) opinion at least, C1 language
input better suits the social reality of the classroom
because it is real for the learners and therefore more
effective in activating the learning process.
The disadvantages with these kinds of materials
are that they fail to exploit the language learners
natural curiosity in other cultures and, in the absence
of information to the contrary, students are likely to
assume that other cultures operate in the same way
as their own (Byram 1991: 18). Also, although the
intention may be to reinforce the learners national
identity, paradoxically, they may be prevented from
doing this because they have nothing to compare
their culture with (Cortazzi & Jin 1999); true
understanding of our own culture can only come
from seeing how other societies operate. Finally,
restricting the cultural input to the C1 limits the
marketability of textbooks, rendering them less cost
effective for publishers (Alptekin 1993).
http://journals.cambridge.org
IP address: 92.241.95.12
Alex Gilmore
more predictable. As we have already seen, however,
the situation with English is much more complicated
because of the wide variety of cultures which call the
language their own. Decisions over whose culture
to represent in language teaching materials are likely
to vary from place to place. Prodromou (1992), in
his survey of Greek students attitudes to Englishspeaking cultures, found a marked preference for the
British over the American model, which he accounts
for in terms of the historical tensions between Greece
and the United States, but this is likely to be the
reverse in Japan where students tend to have a far
greater affiliation with America. There is, of course,
no reason why a wide variety of English-speaking
cultures cannot be represented in language textbooks
and this might be more fitting to its international
status, while at the same time rendering publications
more marketable worldwide. In my opinion, it is
essential to include the target culture (or rather
cultures) within language teaching materials in order
to serve the broader educational goal of developing
learners intercultural communicative competence
(Byram & Fleming 1998). In modern urban societies,
characterised by their social and cultural heterogeneity (Schiffrin 1996: 313), successful communication
depends on much more than a superficial command
of a target language, it also requires an ability to see
the world from different perspectives:
What is at issue here is a modification of monocultural awareness.
From being ethnocentric and aware only of cultural phenomena
as seen from their existing viewpoint, learners are to acquire an
intercultural awareness which recognises that such phenomena
can be seen from a different perspective, from within a different
culture and ethnic identity. (Byram 1991: 19)
106
http://journals.cambridge.org
IP address: 92.241.95.12
Authenticity in FLL
http://journals.cambridge.org
IP address: 92.241.95.12
Alex Gilmore
major implications for materials design. However,
meaningful results will depend on carefully conceived
experimental designs that attempt to account for all
of the variables outlined above. To my knowledge,
only three empirical studies have so far been
conducted into the effects of authentic materials on
motivation (Kienbaum et al. 1986; Gonzalez 1990;
Peacock 1997). Keinbaum et al. hypothesised that
a communicative methodology used in conjunction
with authentic materials could increase students
motivation towards studying German, French and
Spanish as a foreign language. Twenty-nine American
college students received either the control or
experimental treatment over a period of 30 weeks
and, although no statistically significant differences
were found between groups at the end of the
trial in terms of language performance, they report
that their qualitative data indicated that students
were well motivated by the use of authentic
materials. Unfortunately, they do not establish
whether this was as a result of the materials or the
methodology used in the experimental group. The
researchers used an attitude survey to try and quantify
differences in motivation between the control and
experimental groups, but only three items out of
23 on the questionnaire actually focussed on the
method or materials employed so their results are
far from convincing. Gonzalez (1990) investigated
whether exposure to authentic materials (but only
as textbook supplements) would have any effect on
Spanish-language learners attitude, motivation and
culture/language achievement. Forty-three students
at an American college, assigned to either control or
experimental groups, received the treatment over a
period of 10 weeks, but no statistically significant
differences in either levels of satisfaction (ibid.:
105f.) or achievement were found. Unfortunately, the
learners feelings towards the use of authentic materials were only measured by one item on a self-report
Foreign Language Attitude Questionnaire. Some of
the qualitative data in the study from student feedback
and instructors logs did indicate a positive reaction
towards the authentic supplements but to what extent
this is due to the materials themselves and not just
a desire to do something other than the assigned
textbook is impossible to determine. Peacock (1997)
provides the most convincing empirical results on
authenticity and motivation available to date. He used
a more sophisticated model of motivation interest
in and enthusiasm for the materials used in class;
persistence with the learning task, as indicated by
levels of attention or action for extended periods
of time; and levels of concentration or enjoyment
(Crookes & Schmidt 1991: 498502) to investigate
the effects of authentic materials on beginnerlevel, English language university students in South
Korea over a period of 20 days. He found highly
significant (p < 0.001) increases in both on-task
behaviour and overall class motivation when students
108
http://journals.cambridge.org
IP address: 92.241.95.12
Authenticity in FLL
http://journals.cambridge.org
IP address: 92.241.95.12
Alex Gilmore
reading comprehension in Japanese college students.
They found that both types of text modification
improved learner comprehension compared to the
unmodified NS versions and conclude that text
elaboration is a viable alternative to simplification
(ibid.: 214). Although this result may seem to
disfavour the use of authentic texts, it is important
to remember that elaboration is likely to occur in
the classroom anyway, even when it is not explicitly
designed into the materials. Teachers naturally clarify,
rephrase, and make connections explicit to mediate
between the materials and learners, and learners also
negotiate meaning between themselves in order to
comprehend input (Hammond & Gibbons 2005).
Other researchers have tried to simplify spoken
texts by altering the delivery rate or by inserting
pauses into the discourse, again with mixed results.
Griffiths (1990) observed that above average speech
rates led to a significant reduction in comprehension
(as did Conrad 1989) but slower than average rates had
no significant effects (see also Blau 1990; Derwing &
Munro 2001). Both Blau (ibid.) and Derwing (2006)
noted improvements in learners comprehension
when pauses were inserted at sentence, clause
or phrase boundaries or after key lexical items
respectively. However, Derwing (1990) found that
increased total pause time had an inhibiting effect
on learner comprehension. These results do not
appear, therefore, to favour contrived over authentic
listening texts as long as the authentic recordings
are selected carefully to filter out above average
articulation rates. Pauses, even if they are found to
be beneficial, can easily be introduced mechanically
in the class by the teacher. However, much more
research is needed in this area before we can come
to any reliable conclusions. How, for example, does
varying the lexical density affect comprehension,
and can learners cope with higher articulation rates
in authentic speech which, as we have seen, tends
to be more spread out (Bygate 1987: 16)? Does
slowing articulation rates or inserting pauses benefit
different proficiency levels to different degrees? What
difference does inclusion of visual support through
the use of video make to learner comprehension?
Writers who dispute the benefits of text
simplification often do so on the grounds that: a) it
makes the task of reading more difficult by reducing
the number of linguistic and extralinguistic cues
(Grellet 1981; Johnson 1982; Clarke 1989; Willis &
Willis 1996); b) it can cause unnaturalness at the
discourse level (McCarthy 1991); and c) it can prevent
learners from looking beyond the most obvious
meanings of words and from acquiring the ability
to interpret representational as well as referential
language (Swaffar 1985; Vincent 1986; McRae
1996). In terms of empirical evidence against text
modification, the evidence is rather limited, however.
Allen, Bernhardt, Berry & Demel (1988) found that
high school foreign language students coped well
110
http://journals.cambridge.org
IP address: 92.241.95.12
Authenticity in FLL
http://journals.cambridge.org
IP address: 92.241.95.12
Alex Gilmore
High Challenge
(Effective learning)
High Support
(Learner frustration)
(Minimal learning)
Low Support
(Learner boredom)
Low Challenge
Figure 1 The learning consequences of variation in
challenge and support in the language classroom.
7. Conclusion
Although much of the research reviewed above points
to the inadequacies of current language textbooks
and often makes specific recommendations on ways
to improve them, change has been slow to take place.
112
http://journals.cambridge.org
IP address: 92.241.95.12
Authenticity in FLL
discrete-point syllabus is abandoned. As Skehan
(1998: 94) remarks, the 3Ps approach lends itself
very neatly to accountability, since it generates
clear and tangible goals, precise syllabuses, and a
comfortingly itemizable basis for the evaluation of
effectiveness.
8. Future directions
Suggestions for future work include the following:
(i) More classroom-based empirical research on
the effects of text-driven or communicative
competence-centred approaches, since few longitudinal studies exist at present.
(ii) Improved communication between researchers,
material writers and teachers to ensure that
theoretical insights with pedagogic significance
find their way into language teaching materials
(Tomlinson 1998: 343).
(iii) Improvements in pre- and in-service teacher
training to ensure that teachers are up-to-date
with developments in the wide range of fields
that influence our profession. At present, teachertraining courses, such as the Cambridge CELTA,
still tend to emphasize linguistic competence at
the expense of the other areas that contribute to
learners communicative ability, thus perpetuating
the current bias within language teaching. As we
have seen, authentic materials are rich sources of
information on different aspects of communicative
competence but if teachers are themselves unaware
of these insights, they are likely to remain
unnoticed in the classroom.
(iv) More research into practical ways to test students
performance with communicative competencecentred approaches. Although methods for testing
linguistic competence are well established, studies
into ways of effectively assessing learners strategic,
pragmatic and discourse competences are in
the early stages (Kohonen 1999; Johnson 2000;
Shohamy 2000; Young 2002).
References
Aijmer, K. (1996). Conversational routines in English. Harlow:
Addison Wesley Longman.
Alderson J. C. & A. Beretta (eds.) (1992). Evaluating second
language education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Allen, E., E. B. Bernhardt, M. T. Berry & M. Demel (1988).
Comprehension and text genre: An analysis of secondary
foreign language readers. Modern Language Journal 72.2,
163172.
Allwright, D. & K. Bailey (1991). Focus on the language
classroom: An introduction to classroom research for language
teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Allwright, R. (1984). Why dont learners learn what teachers
teach? The interaction hypothesis. In D. Singleton & D.
Little (eds.), Language learning in formal and informal contexts.
Dublin: IRAAL, 318.
Alptekin, C. (1993). Target-language culture in EFL
materials. ELT Journal 47.2, 136143.
Alptekin, C. & M. Alptekin (1984). The question of culture:
EFL teaching in non-English speaking countries. ELT
Journal 38.1, 1420.
Altman, R. (1990). Giving and taking advice without offense.
In R. C. Scarcella, E. J. Anderson & S. D. Krashen (eds.),
Developing communicative competence in a second language. New
York: Newbury House, 9599.
Anderson, A. & T. Lynch (1988). Listening. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
113
http://journals.cambridge.org
IP address: 92.241.95.12
Alex Gilmore
Argyle, M. & M. Cook (1976). Gaze and mutual gaze.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Arnold, E. (1991). Authenticity revisited: How real is real?
English for Specific Purposes 10.3, 237244.
Bachman, L. (1991). What does language testing have to offer?
TESOL Quarterly 25.4, 671704.
Bachman, L. & A. Palmer (1996). Language testing in practice.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bacon, S. & M. Finnemann (1990). A study of the attitudes,
motives, and strategies of university foreign language
students and their disposition to authentic oral and written
input. The Modern Language Journal 74.4, 459473.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. & Z. Dornyei (1998). Do language
learners recognize pragmatic violations? Pragmatic versus
grammatical awareness in instructed L2 learning. TESOL
Quarterly 32.2, 233259.
Bardovi-Harlig, K., B. A. S. Hartford, R. Mahan-Taylor,
M. J. Morgan & D. W. Reynolds (1991). Developing
pragmatic awareness: Closing the conversation. ELT Journal
45.1, 415.
Basturkmen, H. (2001). Descriptions of spoken language for
higher level learners: The example of questioning. ELT
Journal 55.1, 413.
Batstone, R. (1996). Noticing. ELT Journal 50.3, 273.
Bell, J. & R. Gower (1998). Writing course materials for the
world: A great compromise. In B. Tomlinson (ed.), Materials
development in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 116129.
Belton, A. (1988). Lexical naturalness in native and non-native
discourse. English Language Research Journal 2, 79106.
Benson, P. & P. Voller (eds.) (1997). Autonomy and independence
in language learning. London: Longman.
Biber, D., S. Conrad & R. Reppen (1994). Corpus-based
approaches to issues in applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics
15.2, 169189.
Bisong, J. (1995). Language choice and cultural imperialism:
A Nigerian perspective. ELT Journal 49.2, 122132.
Blau, E. K. (1990). The effects of syntax, speed, and pauses on
listening comprehension. TESOL Quarterly 24.4, 746753.
Bouton, L. F. (1990). The effective use of implicature in
English: Why and how it should be taught in the ESL
classroom. In L. F. Bouton & Y. Kachru (eds.), Pragmatics
and language learning monograph series (vol. 1). UrbanaChampaign, IL: University of Illinois, 4352.
Bouton, L. F. (1996). Pragmatics and language learning. In
L. F. Bouton (ed.), Pragmatics and language learning (vol. 7).
Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Illinois, Division of
English as an International Language, 120.
Bouton, L. F. (1999). Developing nonnative speaker skills in
interpreting conversational implicatures in English. In E.
Hinkel (ed.), Culture in second language teaching and learning.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 4770.
Bowers, R. (1992). Memories, metaphors, maxims, and
myths: Language learning and cultural awareness. ELT
Journal 46.1, 2938.
Boxer, D. & L. Pickering (1995). Problems in the presentation
of speech acts in ELT materials: The case of complaints.
ELT Journal 49.1, 4458.
Breen, M. (1985). Authenticity in the language classroom.
Applied Linguistics 6.1, 6070.
Brown, G. (1990). Cultural values: The interpretation of
discourse. ELT Journal 44.1, 1117.
Brown, G. & G. Yule (1983). Teaching the spoken language.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, J. D. (1988). Understanding research in second language
learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bruner, J. (1983). Childs talk: Learning to use language. New
York: Norton.
Bublitz, W. (1988). Supportive fellow speakers and cooperative
conversations. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
114
http://journals.cambridge.org
IP address: 92.241.95.12
Authenticity in FLL
115
http://journals.cambridge.org
IP address: 92.241.95.12
Alex Gilmore
University of Illinois, Division of English as an International
Language, 122.
Kienbaum, B. E., A. J. Russell & S. Welty (1986).
Communicative competence in foreign language learning with
authentic materials: Final project report. Washington: Center
for International Education, Purdue University.
King, C. P. (1990). A linguistic and a cultural competence:
Can they live happily together? Foreign Language Annals
23.1, 6570.
Kohonen, V. (1999). Authentic assessment in affective foreign
language education. In J. Arnold (ed.), Affect in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 279294.
Kramsch, C. (1993). Context and culture in language teaching.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kramsch, C. & P. Sullivan (1996). Appropriate pedagogy.
ELT Journal 50.3, 199212.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications.
London: Longman.
Krashen, S. (1989). Language acquisition and language education.
Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall International.
Kuo, C. (1993). Problematic issues in EST materials
development. English for Specific Purposes 12.2, 171181.
Lee, W. (1995). Authenticity revisited: Text authenticity and
learner authenticity. ELT Journal 49.4, 323328.
Leow, R. P. (1993). To simplify or not to simplify: A look at
intake. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 15.3, 333355.
Lewis, M. (1993). The lexical approach: The state of ELT and the
way forward. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.
Lewkowicz, J. (2000). Authenticity in language testing: Some
outstanding questions. Language Testing 17.1, 4364.
Lightbown, P. (2000). Anniversary article: Classroom SLA
research and second language teaching. Applied Linguistics
21.4, 431462.
Little, D. & D. Singleton (1991). Authentic texts, pedagogical
grammar and language awareness in foreign language
learning. In C. James & P. Garrett (eds.), Language awareness
in the classroom. London: Longman, 123132.
Little, D., S. Devitt & D. Singleton (1989). Learning foreign
languages from authentic texts: Theory and practice. Dublin:
Authentik in association with CILT.
Long, M. (1985). Input and second language acquisition
theory. In S. M. Gass & C. G. Madden (eds.), Input in
second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House,
377393.
Mariani, L. (1997). Teacher support and teacher challenge in
promoting learner autonomy. Perspectives 23.2, 110.
McCarthy, M. (1991). Discourse Analysis for language teachers.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McCarthy, M. & R. Carter (1994). Language as discourse.
Harlow: Longman.
McCarthy, M. & R. Carter (1995). Spoken grammar: What
is it and how can we teach it? ELT Journal 49.3, 207218.
McCarthy, M. & R. Carter (1997). Octopus or hydra?
IATEFL Newsletter No. 137, 1617.
McDonough, J. & C. Shaw (1993). Materials and methods in
ELT. Oxford: Blackwell.
McGarry, D. (1995). Learner autonomy 4: The role of authentic
texts. Dublin: Authentik.
McLaughlin, B. (1987). Theories of second language learning.
London: Edward Arnold.
McRae, J. (1996). Representational language learning: From
language awareness to text awareness. In R. Carter & J.
McRae (eds.), Language, literature and the learner. London:
Longman, 1640.
McVeigh, B. J. (2002). Japanese higher education as myth. New
York: M. E. Sharpe.
Mishan, F. (2005). Designing authenticity into language learning
materials. Bristol: Intellect.
Modiano, M. (2001). Linguistic imperialism, cultural integrity, and EIL. ELT Journal 55.4, 339347.
Morrison, B. (1989). Using news broadcasts for authentic
listening comprehension. ELT Journal 43.1, 1418.
Morrow, K. (1977). Authentic texts and ESP. In S. Holden
(ed.), English for Specific Purposes. London: Modern English
Publications, 1317.
Morrow, K. (1981). Principles of communicative methodology. In K. Johnson & K. Morrow (eds.), Communication in
the classroom. Harlow: Longman, 5969.
Myers Scotton, C. & J. Bernsten (1988). Natural conversations
as a model for textbook dialogue. Applied Linguistics 9.4,
372384.
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nelson, G. (1995). Considering culture: Guidelines for
ESL/EFL textbook writers. In P. Byrd (ed.) Material writers
guide. New York: Heinle & Heinle Publishers, 2342.
Newman, B. (1996). Global chatter: The reality of business
English. English Today 46.12 (2), 1619.
Nunan, D. (1988). Syllabus design. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nunan, D. (1996). Issues in second language acquisition research: Examining substance and procedure. In W.
Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (eds.), Handbook of second
language acquisition. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 349
374.
OConnor Di Vito, N. (1991). Incorporating native speaker
norms in second language materials. Applied Linguistics 12.4,
383396.
Omaggio, A. C. (1986). Teaching language in context: Proficiencyoriented instruction. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
ONeill, R. & R. Scott (1974). Viewpoints. London:
Longman.
Oxford, R. & J. Shearin (1994). Language learning
motivation: Expanding the theoretical framework. The
Modern Language Journal 78.1, 1228.
Peacock, M. (1997). The effect of authentic materials on the
motivation of EFL learners. ELT Journal 51.2, 144156.
Pearson, E. (1986). Agreement/disagreement: An example
of results of discourse analysis applied to the oral English
classroom. I.T.L. Review of Applied Linguistics 74, 4761.
Pennycook, A. (1994). The cultural politics of English as an
international language. Harlow: Longman.
Phillipson, R. (1992a). ELT: the native speakers burden? ELT
Journal 46.1, 1218.
Phillipson, R. (1992b). Linguistic imperialism. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Porter, D. & J. Roberts (1981). Authentic listening activities.
ELT Journal 36.1, 3747.
Porter Ladousse, G. (1999). Review of exploring spoken
English. ELT Journal 53.2, 139141.
Powell, M. (1992). Semantic/pragmatic regularities in informal lexis: British speakers in spontaneous conversational
settings. Text 12.1, 1958.
Prabhu, N. (1987). Second language pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Prodromou, L. (1988). English as cultural action. ELT Journal
42.2, 7383.
Prodromou, L. (1992). What culture? Which culture? Crosscultural factors in language learning. ELT Journal 46.1, 39
50.
Prodromou, L. (1996). Correspondence section. ELT Journal
50.4, 371373.
Prodromou, L. (1997). From corpus to octopus. IATEFL
Newsletter No. 137, 1821.
Psathas, G. & M. Kozloff (1976). The structure of directions.
Semiotica 17.2, 111130.
116
http://journals.cambridge.org
IP address: 92.241.95.12
Authenticity in FLL
117
http://journals.cambridge.org
IP address: 92.241.95.12
Alex Gilmore
van Ek, J. A. (1986). Objectives for foreign language learning,
vol.1: Scope. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
van Lier, L. (1984). Discourse analysis and classroom research:
A methodological perspective. International Journal of the
Sociology of Language 49, 111133.
van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the language curriculum: Awareness, autonomy and authenticity. London: Longman.
Vincent, M. (1986). Simple text and reading text. In
C. J. Brumfit & R. A. Carter (eds.), Literature and language
teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 208215.
Viney, P. & K. Viney (1996). Handshake. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher
psychological processes, edited by M. Cole, V. John-Steiner,
S. Scribner & E. Souberman. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Wajnryb, R. (1996). Death, taxes and jeopardy: Systematic
omissions in EFL texts, or life was never meant to be
an adjacency pair. Paper presented at the 9th Educational
Conference, Sydney.
Wall, A. P. (1987). Say it naturally. Boston, MA: Heinle &
Heinle Publishers.
Wallace, C. (1992). Reading. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wallace, M. J. (1983). Survey of listening materials. Appendix
to Scottish Education Departments Interim report: Listening
comprehension project.
Widdowson, H. G. (1978). Teaching language as communication.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Widdowson, H. G. (1979). Explorations in applied linguistics 1.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Widdowson, H. G. (1983). Talking shop: H. G. Widdowson
on literature and ELT. ELT Journal 37.1, 3035.
Widdowson, H. G. (1994). The ownership of English. TESOL
Quarterly 28.2, 377388.
Widdowson, H. G. (1996). Comment: authenticity and autonomy in ELT. ELT Journal 50.1, 6768.
Widdowson, H. G. (1998). Context, community, and authentic language. TESOL Quarterly 32.4, 705716.
Widdowson, H. G. (2002). Text and pretext in language use
and learning. Paper presented at British Council, Osaka,
Japan, November 2002.
Widdowson, H. G. (2003). Defining issues in English language
teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Williams, E. (1983). Communicative reading. In K. Johnson
& D. Porter. (eds.), Perspectives in communicative language
teaching. London: Academic Press, 171188.
Williams, J. (1990). Another look at yes/no questions: Native
speakers and non-native speakers. Applied Linguistics 11.2,
159182.
Williams, M. (1988). Language taught for meetings and
language used in meetings: Is there anything in common?
Applied Linguistics 9.1, 4558.
118
http://journals.cambridge.org
IP address: 92.241.95.12