House, J 2012, 'Teaching oral skills in English as a Lingua Franca', in L Alsagoff, SL McKay, G Hu & WA Renandya (eds.

), Principles and Practices for

Teaching English as an International Language, Routledge, New York, pp186-205.

Chapter I I Teaching Oral Skills in English as a Lingua Franca 187

Teaching Oral Skills in the vast formal and functional plurality of English indicating national,
regional, local, cross-cultural variation, the distinct identities of these
English as a Lingua Franca varieties, their degrees of acculturation and indigenization, and their
embeddedness in a multilingual and multicultural context.
ELF provides a kind of "global currency" for people from a great
Juliane House
variety of backgrounds who come into contact with one another and
use the English language as a default means of communication. ELF as a
contact language is often used in short contact situations, such that fleeting
English norms are in operation, with variation being one of the hallmarks
of ELF (Firth, 2009). Thus ELF does not function as a territorialized and
institutionalized "second language," nor can it be described as a variety
with its own literary or cultural products, as is the case with the English
In this chapter I will first briefly characterize the nature of English as an language used for instance in Singapore, Nigeria, Malaysia, or India,
international language, World Englishes, and English as a lingua franca. where WE have emerged in different ways from much longer contact
W hile I refer in this chapter predominantly to recent empirical research on situations.
English as a lingua franca, I suggest that since interactions in English as a Since the research presented in this chapter refers to ELF use, I will
lingua franca are found to differ on the levels of discourse and pragmatics now try to describe in some more detail what ELF has come to mean, and
from Inner-Circle English talk, they may well also be relevant for speakers what the notion of a lingua franca implies.
of English as an international language and World Englishes. In its original meaning, a lingua franca-the term comes from Arabic
I will propose several ways of applying these research results to lisan al farang-was simply an intermediary or contact language used, for
improving ways of teaching oral skills in English as a global lingua instance, by speakers of Arabic with travellers from Western Europe. Its
franca and concentrate on making suggestions about the development of meaning was later extended to describe a language of commerce, a rather
" pragmatic fluency" and intercultural competence in order to heighten stable variety with little room for individual variation. This meaning is not
speakers' oral English competence and their interactional awareness applicable to today's most important lingua franca: global English, whose
major feature is its enormous functional flexibility and spread across
many different linguistic, geographical, and cultural areas, as well as its
Characteristics of English as an International
openness to foreign forms. In both its international and intra-national
Language, World Englishes, and English as a use, ELF can best be described as a special type of contact language and
Lingua Franca intercultural communication where each combination of interactants,
W hile "English as an international language" (EIL), "World Englishes" each discourse community, negotiates their own lingua franca use in
(WE) , and "English as a lingua franca" (ELF) all refer to the global nature, terms of code- switching, discourse strategies, negotiation of forms and
spread, and use of the English language, it is important to tease them meanings.
apart. In this chapter, as in this volume as a whole, WE can be defined In its role as an auxiliary language, English can be compared to Latin at
as institutionalized second-language varieties of English in the sense of the time of the late RomanEmpire, or French in the 17th and 18th centuries.
Kachru (1986). These nativized varieties of English have a long ( often When the so-called Western world in the second half of the 20th century
colonial) history of linguistic and cultural adaptation to new geographical came to depend on border-crossing communication, political, economic
contexts, and they fulfill many different and important functions in the and scientific cooperation, and supranational organization, it so happened
respective local legal, administrative, and educational system. that English was in the right place at the right time (Crystal, 1997). By
EIL is here defined as the use of English between L2 speakers of English then English had spread to so many ethnically diverse societies, and had
regardless of whether they share the same culture or not, and between L2 acquired a considerable cultural distance from its original British culture.
and L1 English speakers. SinceEIL includes bothWE speakers' interactions It therefore offered itself as a convenient language for communication.
in their own country and interactions in ELF, it is the most comprehensive Another more linguistic factor that helped propel English into a position
term and also the linguistically most complex use of English, as it captures of first choice for an auxiliary language is the fact that English has long
188 Juliane House Teaching Oral Skills in English as a Lingua Franca 189

been, especially in its lexical repertoire, a rich mixture of Romance and results include a reduced variety of tokens, shorter turns than in native
Germanic languages, languages of supra-regional importance in their own English talk, frequent use of non-verbal supportive back-channeling,
right. especially laughter, and little interference from Ll discourse norms.
ELF is not in any sense a restricted language, but a means of Some of Meierkord's findings were confirmed by Firth (1996)
communication showing full linguistic and functional range. Users of an Wagner and Firth (1997) who analyzed telephone conversations
d
ELF are not "learners," but rather multilingual individuals possessing between employees of Danish companies and their foreign partners. The
"multicompetence" (Cook 1992; Bassetti & Cook, 2011), which is to be authors stress the "fleeting" nature of ELF talk, the fluidity of norms,
taken as a yardstick for describing and explaining ELF communication. and participants' attempts at conversational attuning resulting in overtly
Relevant here is the rich literature on bilingualism, where the notion consensus-oriented interactional behavior and in interactants' attempts
of a "simultaneous activation" of speakers' native tongue and ELF in to "normalize" potential trouble sources in a preventive way, rather than
the cognitive structures of bilingual subjects is widely accepted today attend to them explicitly, via repair initiation, reformulation, or other
(Grosjean, 2001). negotiating behaviors.
A major characteristic of ELF is its multiplicity of voices. ELF is a As long as a threshold of understanding is achieved, ELF participants
language for communication, a medium that can be given substance with adopt a "Let-it-pass" principle (Firth, 1996), an interpretive procedure
many different national, regional, local, and individual cultural identities. that makes the interactional style "robust," "normal," and consensual.
When English is used in interactions between, say, German, Chinese, and This ordinariness is a joint achievement of interactants, who manage to
Korean native speakers, the differences in native interactional norms, sustain the appearance of normality despite being exposed to relatively
standards of politeness, feelings of cultural and historical tradition may "abnormal" linguistic behavior. Achieving ordinariness is the direct
remain intact. These norms are not shared, nor need they be. Localized or outcome of the "Let-it-pass" procedure, to which interactants resort
regionalized ELF varieties-whose linguistic surface is English, but whose whenever understanding threatens to become difficult. The "ordinariness"
speakers creatively perform pragmatic shifts in using ELF-have taken of ELF discourse is also achieved via a "make-it-normal" orientation:
over the linguistic landscape. Non-native speakers of English anywhere in when ELF speakers are faced with interlocutors' marked lexical and
the world have been developing their own discourse strategies, speech act phonological selections, unidiomatic phrasings, morphological vagaries,
modifications, and communicative styles in their use of ELF. and idiosyncratic syntactic structuring, they deliberately divert attention
ELF is no more and no less than "a contact language between persons from these infelicitous forms. This behavior is also evident in the surprising
who share neither a common native tongue nor a common national culture, absence of "other repairs" and requests for information or confirmation,
and for whom English is the chosen foreign language of communication" as these might expose interlocutors' linguistic "deficits" and threaten
(Firth, 1996, p. 20). How do speakers make this type of communication their face. They appear to be competent enough to be able to monitor
work? In what follows, a number of studies that have examined ELF each others' moves at a high level of awareness, preventing a breakdown
speakers' interactional behavior in both general conversational and in communication through helping each other in collaborative action and
institutional academic settings will be discussed. joint discourse production.
An important general characteristic of ELF talk is its enormous inherent
Pragmatics and Discourse-related Studies of ELF: variability (Firth, 2009). This variability is not to be equated with ELF
Some Research Findings as a Basis for Developing speakers' failure to fulfill native norms, and their widely varying levels
of competence in English. Rather it lies at the core of ELF discourse,
Oral Competence in Global ELF
where speakers creatively exploit, intentionally appropriate, locally
An important early work on ELF pragmatics is Meierkord's (1996) adapt, and communicatively align the potential inherent in the forms and
analysis of audiotaped English dinner-table conversations elicited in a functions, items and collocations of the English language they use in their
British student residence from subjects of many different L1 backgrounds. performance as the need arises.
She examined opening and closing phases, gambits, topic management, If ELF interactants do not seek to adjust to some real or imaginary
politeness, turn-taking, overlaps, and hesitation phenomena, and found native-speaker norm, they conceive of themselves as individual ELF users
surprisingly few misunderstandings. Trouble spots were usually not united in different "communities of practice" (see Wenger, 1989; House,
overcome by negotiations but by often abrupt topic changes. Further 2003a for applying the concept to ELF research). The notion "community
190 Juliane House Teaching Oral Skills in English as a Lingua Franca 191

of practice" is most appropriate for ELF in that the constitution of a devices, both expressed with reduced self-monitoring, i.e., automatically,
community of practice is governed by a joint purpose, i.e., to communicate "off-guard." That switching into one's mother tongue should occur in
efficiently in English as the chosen and agreed means of communication this particular interactive slot is thus easily explained. Similar findings
without, however, heeding or being constrained by English native norms. of the frequent use of code-switching in ELF talk are reported in Polzl
A project specifically concerned with discourse pragmatics is the and Seidlhofer (2006) with reference to the use of Arabic gambits and
Hamburg ELF project (cf. Baumgarten & House, 2010a, 20106· other L1 derived discourse phenomena, and by Jenkins (2009) who found
House, 2002, 2008, 2009; House & Levy-Todter, 2010). Here we hav; many instances of code-switching by ELF speakers of Asian Lls. Cogo
collected a corpus of everyday ELF interactions between international (2009) also documents code-switching in ELF discourse. Interestingly, she
students of many different Lls, institutional ELF discourse between also found that interactants sometimes switch not to their respective Lls
students and faculty as well as post hoc interviews. 1 The analyses of but to a third shared language.
this data essentially confirm previous findings. However, several other Here are two examples of code-switching taken from the Hamburg
characteristics of ELF interactions have also emerged. They will be corpus of ELF interactions in academic advising sessions (cf. e.g., House
discussed in what follows. & Levy-Todter, 2010; House, 2010), where code-switching occurs from
ELF into one of the interactants' German mother tongue. The interaction
takes place between a professor (P), his assistant (WM), and a Spanish
Recourse to LI: Pragmatic Transfer and Code-switching
exchange student in a German university. In these and all the following
Pragmatic transfer from the Ll occurs frequently in ELF discourse. Thus, excerpts a simplified transcription is used for ease of comprehension.
Asian speakers often employ cyclical topic management, i.e., there is no Italics are used in these excerpts to highlight the respective forms and
strictly linear progression of a chosen topic as tends to be the case in phenomena under discussion.
Inner-Circle English but rather a series of introducing and re-introducing
a particular topic in a cycle. This often results in turns-at-talk that lack
Excerpt I
sequentiality-a phenomenon, however, that tends to be consistently
ignored by other participants, such that the talk remains "robust," P: And then you may put everything like in this drawing and then
"normal," and never breaks down (House, 2002). Another example of afterwards we can think whether to find some (.) simplified
pragmatic transfer is the use of Ll-specific conventions of directness. For equation (.) erm (speaking to WM) macht das Excel ? so irgendwie
instance, speakers of Ll German use speech acts with the high directness I I don't know what do you know wh whether whether Excel
level conventionalized in German (Blum-Kulka, House, & Kasper, makes something ap approximation? maybe?
1989), but not in English. In the post hoc interviews we conducted with S: I think uhhh
interactants, they themselves ascribed such an interactional style to native
discourse norms. The frequent use of the discourse marker Represent, In Excerpt 1 P switches into German in the middle of his lengthy turn to
with which speakers repeat (parts of) previous speakers' turn, serves quickly request some information from his assistant in a routine exchange
to support speakers' working memory and ease processing (see below). that functions as a sort of side sequence to the primary interaction. Such
But Represents can however also be interpreted as pragmatic transfer side sequences are often unconsciously and automatically conducted in
from Asian languages and be understood as a sign of politeness, because speakers' mother tongue. This is a natural occurrence, and it should not
explicitly verbalized acknowledgment of other speakers' talk can be be discouraged but rather be recommended to ELF users as a useful aid in
considered to support one's interactional partner and to aim at consensus­ maintaining the smooth flow of the conversation.
building.
Another important Ll related strategy is Code-Switching, frequently Excerpt 2
used in ELF talk mostly to overcome speakers' linguistic limitations (House
& Levy-Todter, 2010). A case in point is the use of Ll discourse markers P: The printing is is wrong only the printing or?
(such as for instance the German gambit ja), in particular "uptakers" S: I think only the printing [because]
and "go-ons" (Edmondson & House, 1981). Uptakers usually occur as P: [ja ja ja]
second-pair parts of exchanges, and go-ons are used as back-channel S: in my file is okay
192 Juliane House Teaching Oral Skills in English as a Lingua Franca 193

P: Strange Excerpt 3
S: In in your file is okay in computer?
Mauri: But the grammar is quite different very different
P: I didn't look I didn't look but it (mumbles unintelligibly)
Is very different
WM: But if it is a pdf document Wei:
Mauri: between Chinese and Japanese
P: must be must be =
WM: = then we have the same in the document we have the
P: Na ja na ja Excerpt 4
Joy: And you mean that English (2 sec) is really getting important or
In Excerpt 2 the professor uses the German gambit ja as a Go on and
taken for the education because the grammar is syntactical erm
the Uptaker na ja as signs of little conscious control, occurring off-guard
the grammar is very easy
as it were. Again this is a perfectly ordinary occurrence in ELF interactions
Wei: Is easy is very easy
whenever one of the interactants is familiar with the other's Ll-and
as such this brief recourse to speakers' Ll should be promoted and not
In Excerpt 3 and 4 we notice how the use of the Represents results
discouraged. Similar interactions in which participants can practice their
in a kind of stalling of the interactional flow-similar to speakers' L1
oral skills in ELF can be used in the classroom for instance by using
interjections discussed above-and provides support for themse�ves
provocative trigger text to stimulate conversations. These conversations
and for their interlocutors whenever more time is needed for planmng,
will be taped, transcribed, and used by the teacher in post hoc discussions
verbalization, and articulation. Another interpretation of the function of
of students' own productions. In this way, insights into the reasons for
the use of Represents is that it is a sign of pragmatic transfer f�om Wei, �he
students' linguistic choices can be elicited. In this reflective process in
Chinese participant's mother tongue where Represents funct10n as a sign
which teachers and students jointly engage, students will develop an
of Asian politeness and acknowledgment of one's interlocutor's message.
increased awareness of their own competence in ELF and their degree of
But Represents as signs of accommodating to one's interlocutor's needs
pragmatic fluency (House, 1996).
also occur in interactions featuring European ELF interactants (French,
Czech, Croatian) as in the following example:
Accommodation: Re-presenting Information and
Co-constructing Utterances
Excerpt 5
In ELF talk, (parts of) previous speakers' moves are frequently "represented"
Hilda: . If you start speaking English in France they will answer you in
(House, 2002). Represents (Edmondson, 1981) are multifunctional
French
gambits used to support speakers' working memory; to create coherence
Anne: Answer you in French that that's true
via the construction of lexical-paradigmatic clusters; to signal receipt, and
Sue: That's true
confirm comprehension. All of these uses can be interpreted as a deliberate
accommodative strategy to ELF speakers' particular needs. Represents are
Here again the use of the Represent acts is a useful strategy for helping
also known in the literature as "echo," "mirror," or "shadow" elements that
self and others formulate further thoughts.
typically occur in psycho-therapeutic interviews, instructional discourse,
ELF speakers also consistently demonstrate solidarity and consensus
and aircraft control discourse-genres in which information is deliberately
in the face of marked linguistic and cultural differences. For instance,
and routinely restated to ensure understanding. The fact that ELF speakers
speakers often help one another in cases of for�ulation proble�s,
exploit this convention for their own benefit shows that their strategic
joining forces to gradually and jointly build up the discourse m a senes
communicative competence is well developed. Cogo and Dewey (2006)
of scaffolding moves (House, 2003a, 2008). Participants' attempts to
and Cogo (2009) also document many instances of accommodation and
negotiate what it is that each one of them wants to convey leads to a
strategic repetition in their analyses of ELF talk. Here are two examples of
feeling of community, solidarity, and group identity.
the use of Represents as powerful instruments for securing understanding. .
Another useful means for enhancing pragmatic fluency m ELF talk is to
They are taken from the Hamburg corpus of ELF interactions (for details
encourage ELF learners' and users' competence in the art of co-constructing
see House, 2002, 2008, 2009).
194 Juliane House Teaching Oral Skills in English as a Lingua Franca 195

utterances in order to show solidarity when their interlocutors are faced Excerpt 8
with formulation problems. Here are two examples of such useful M: No matter how many people speak in the university some of them
supportive scaffolding activity: speak very well English but erm (1sec) you know the real life it's
different and you have to learn English
Excerpt 6 S: Yeah erm
M: This institution where you're working at is this the only possibility to
Joy: I recently read an article in a Korean erm (2sec) Moment (4sec) erm learn better English
Brit: Newspaper? Internet?
Joy: Yes thank you @ erm the article is about new foreign language The gambit yeah/yes is used in ELF talk with a variety of different
education in Japan functions (Spielmann, 2007; Baumgarten & House, 2010b) such as
uptaking, back-channeling, agreeing, and discourse structuring. All of
Excerpt 7 these uses are potent tools for making the discourse (appear) "normal."
The inherent face-saving feature of yeah/yes and its overall inoffensive
Mau: I think it begins erm of course with the colonialism I think too accommodating undertone make it particularly suitable for ELF talk,
because the history of this if this development how the language in where interactants are well aware of the precarious nature of their
the very early period erm (3 sec) intercultural interaction. ELF speakers therefore often exploit the positive
Joy: Build up this basis import of yeah/yes to tone down objections. You know, yeah can also
Mau: Yes serve as a self-supporting strategy. But the frequent use of yeah/yes in
Joy: To be a world language ELF discourse is probably best explained with its polyfunctionality, which
Mau: Yes renders it "communicatively effective" because a lot of pragmatic content
is packed into minimal verbal form. Findings in Baumgarten and House
In Excerpts (6) and {7) ELF speakers successfully join forces to finish (2010b) and House and Levy-Todter (2010) also point to an interesting
an interlocutor's turn at talk. In both cases the recipient of this support systematic variation in the use of the tokens yes, yeah, and German ja: yes
explicitly acknowledges it. is primarily used as an agreement marker, ja as a back-channeling device,
and yeah as an uptaking and structuring signal supporting speakers' own
Re-interpretation of Discourse Markers: You Know, moves and turns.
Yes/Yeah, So
ELF speakers' use of the discourse markers you know, yes/yeah, and so Excerpt 9
has been found to differ from English native discourse, as will be shown P: There there is erm one week where the building companies come to
in the examples of each of these markers below. to to the university and they make some presentation and =
You know is often described as an interpersonally-oriented marker S: Ahh this week (.) yeah (1 sec)
used as a hedge and signaling politeness. House (2009) reports that ELF P: This one week erm yeah but I cannot do it I have to go here this week
speakers tend to re-interpret you know as a much more self-referenced S: Yeah the week of civil engineering yeah
way of highlighting formulation difficulties and providing coherence in
speakers' own turns. You know frequently co-occurs with the conjunctions In Excerpt 9 the gambit yeah is used strategically to gain time, plug
but, and, because, even taking over their functions in stand-alone position. gaps in the conversation, and take the time it takes to come to terms with
It is also used when speakers reveal planning difficulties by fumbling for an what one's interlocutor has said and to generally monitor each other's
appropriate formulation. In such cases, you know is used in mid-utterance, moves and plan one's next productions while at the same time giving the
often inside nominal, verbal, and adverbial groups to help speakers process interaction a tone of agreement and approval through the meaning of
and plan their own output, and to link stretches of discourse. yeah-in other words a highly useful strategy, which should be taught to
Here is an example of the typical use of you know as a strategy for self­ and practiced by learners and users of ELF.
help and plugging any gaps or pauses in a conversation.
196 Juliane House Teaching Oral Skills in English as a Lingua Franca 197

The marker so also functions as a speaker-supportive element in the expert multilingual user. ELF users' pragmatic fluency (House, 1996)
ELF discourse. So is here used as a deictic element to both support the and their strategic competence enables them to engage in meaningful
planning of their upcoming moves and help them sum up and "seal" effective communication, and to alternatively adhere to their Ll discourse
the preliminary outcome of previous discourse stretches. So functions pragmatic norms as a strategy of identity maintenance or construct new
as a complex double-bind element, a (mental) hinge between what has ELF norms to foster a sense of group identity in their local communities
come before and what will occur next. It certainly does not index other­ of practice. Both strategies are effective and contribute, in their different
attentiveness, and is not used with a strong interpersonal function. Rather ways, to ELF users' increasing independence from English native-speaker
so takes on a text structuring, self-attentive, and self-monitoring function usage.
acting for instance as a stop-gap "fumble" (Edmondson, 1981) to hel� On the basis of the results of the ELF research discussed above, oral
speakers bridge formulation problems. In the majority of occurrences, competence in ELF might be developed using a variety of different scenarios
so follows hesitation markers such as "erm" or "hmm," or pauses, and that reflect students' interests, the domains in which they operate, and
it also often collocates with the connector and. All these co-occurrences their level of proficiency. In such a scenario-based training, students will
show that so in ELF talk acts as a self-prompting strategy to monitor own be made aware of the fact that, in real life, ELF speakers often make use
output and mark the resumption of speech after being "bogged down" of the let-it-pass principle and also engage in code�switching as useful
both turn-initially and in mid-turn. strategies for overcoming formulation difficulties in the English language.
However, in the world of the classroom active use of these principles
have of course a lesser role to play. Here I am merely pleading for making
Excerpt I 0
students aware of these strategies and for changing their attitudes vis­
S: I actually better take some notes a-vis code-switching away from the traditional interpretation as a sign
P: Mhm (1 sec) so there is one one man erm he is working for erm for of a lack of competence in English towards looking upon it as a natural
(company 1) exploitation of a multilingual speaker's linguistic repertoire.
S: Mhmm
P: And erm so he is in the erm working in with the design and calculation
of (company 1) Improving the Practices and Principles of
Teaching Oral Skills in ELF
In Excerpt 10 P uses the marker so following the hesitation marker Given the above results of empirical studies of the use of ELF in oral
mhm and the conjunction and in order to get himself going again, to interaction, I would now like to propose several ways of improving the
resume the train of thought he had begun in his previous move-another practices and principles of teaching spoken English in its lingua franca
useful gambit in ELF conversation which should be taught to and practiced use. Before doing this, I want to briefly sketch some traditional ways of
with learners and users of ELF. teaching oral skills in English. During the classic grammar-translation
Given the linguistic potential of the English language available for approaches, the teaching of speaking played a negligible role. In the
creative appropriation and local re-interpretation, ELF speakers are Reform movement around 1900, the Direct Method and later the Audio­
found t.o effectively engage in self-help interactional behavior both Lingual Method, speaking was considered central in the foreign language
for their own and their interlocutors' benefit, deliberately supporting classroom. Speech as the medium of face-to-face dialogues was and is also
each other's speech production, tolerantly letting others' oddities and central in functional and communicative language teaching. However,
infelicities pass, and generally managing to make interactions robust and this popularity of the spoken language in the communicatively oriented
normal. As indicated above, ELF users are multilingual speakers who classroom has never implied a special methodology particularly geared to
have more than one language at their disposal, and they demonstrate this the characteristics of spoken language. Nor was the teaching of oral skills
in the way they mark identity, attitudes, and alliances, signal discourse considered to be an important sub-domain of communicative competence
functions, convey politeness, create aesthetic and humorous effects, or in its own right which was given an independent value.
pragmatic ambiguity. In ELF research, a radical rethinking of the norm Oral skills have thus not been central in syllabus development, and have
against which speakers' pragmatic discourse behavior is matched, has not addressed the important questions as to the nature of oral skills, the
taken place. This norm is never the monolingual native speaker, but rather types of speaking activities that need to be taught, the route of development
198 Juliane House Teaching Oral Skills in English as a Lingua Franca 199

envisaged, and the particular learning problems they might afford (cf.
Bygate, 2009). What thus often happens in secondary and tertiary a t sequences. Further, the concept of discourse structure in terms of
c nsecutive phases in an interaction: opening phases, central "business
educational contexts is the incidental, non-explicit teaching of oral skills for
instance in so-called conversation classes. These classes are often organized p ases," closing phases. Students will be alerted to the fact that both
c�
in a series of discussion groups with the structure of the course being
determined by the topics which are handled in turn. T hese are generally
�f ening and closing phases tend to be heavily ritualized, and specific tokens
typical utterances in all three phas.es will be intro?uced, explaine?,
matters of moment, taken from newspapers, magazines, and other sources, and practiced in a variety of simulat10n� and scenarios.' Stu�ents �ill
also be introduced to the usefulness of discourse strategies, with which
and it is hoped that the input materials will somehow generate interest and
"engagement" thus stimulating good discussion. This model widely used all speech acts such as e.g., a request, an apology, or a complaint can be
prefaced, grounded, exp�nded upon, or modified in degre�s of politeness
over the world in the teaching of oral skills in English as a global language
and directness. Other important concepts are turn-takmg, feedback,
is, I would submit, of limited effectiveness in terms of improving oral skills initiating, and responding moves, the notion of face, face-threat, and face
of those who participate for the following four reasons:
saving as well as politeness, impoliteness. All these basic concepts of oral
discourse will also need to be considered from a cross-cultural pragmatic
• Participating in organized discussions is a highly marked type of perspective, and they need to be embedded in particular social situations
oral language behavior, which is not very common, except in formal such that students are aware of how the choice of form for the enactment
instructional settings, debating clubs, and so on.
of a particular speech act greatly depends on the particular context-of­
• As only one speaker can speak at one time, opportunities for a turn situation.
at talk are limited, especially if the native-speaker teacher leading The point of this introduction to the make-up and the functioning of oral
the discussion is an active member of the discussion. discourse is to provide students with a useful meta-language with which
• Those learners who are most confident regarding their oral skills (or to capture, describe, and explain what it is they and their interlocutors are
who have the strongest feelings about the topic under discussion) doing when they are engaging in oral English communication. To be able
dominate the talk such that the participants who may in fact most to put a name to what happens when speakers interact with one another is
need the practice tend to get fewer opportunities to talk. a prerequisite to raising students' awareness about their own and others'
• The problem of feedback, and indeed the problem of learning, speech.
is not focused on in any systematic way, but rather ad hoc. The But for students to become pragmatically fluent in ELF talk, it is not
assumption seems to be simply that it is good for you to talk English, only commendable to teach, and provide practical experience in, the use
and the acquisition of communicative oral skills will somehow occur of linguistic-pragmatic strategies such as the ones discussed above, it is
incidentally. also important to develop intercultural competence because ELF, as noted
above, is a hybrid multicultural and intercultural mode of talk.
To remedy this situation it seems necessary first and foremost to heighten
learners' awareness of the nature of the spoken language in general and
the nature of ELF in particular and to use an interactional approach where Developing lntercu/tural Competence in E.LF
individual learners are exposed to interactions in ELF, taught to become Three points need to be stressed for the teaching of intercultural
experts in the use of ELF in interaction and become aware of their own communicative competence to students of English as a lingua franca:
and others' interactional behavior. In this context it is important to provide First, learners and users of ELF, who are interested in using English
ELF learners and users with an appropriate meta-language with which to mainly for communication purposes, should be enabled to keep their
describe interactional moves and strategies. For this a brief introduction to individual discourse styles, their individual capacity for wit, humor,
interaction and intercultural pragmatics is essential. social charm, or repartee, in other words their very own social persona
Here I would recommend introducing students to the important notion in the medium of the English language. This can be achieved not through
of a speech act, provide them with examples of a (simplified) typology of proclaiming such lofty and vague intercultural objectives as tolerance,
speech acts, mentioning e.g., apologies, requests, complaints, promises, empathy, and mutual understanding, but through the acquisition of rather
etc. and the notion of illocutionary force as well as the usefulness of more mundane, practical communicative-linguistic skills such as the ones
gambits or discourse markers as strategic support for the use of speech discussed above with which misunderstandings might be minimized.
200 Juliane House Teaching Oral Skills in English as a Lingua Franca 20 I

Second, for developing intercultural competence in English as a lingua about one's interactants. An increase in knowledge will also make one
franca, it is essential to intensify and make more effective the teaching of more aware of the consequences of acting out one's own discourse style
interactional phenomena so as to enable learners to manage turn-taking in ways that might give offence to one's hearer. And for the extension of
smoothly through sensitizing them to points of transitional relevance, to knowledge we need interdisciplinary work informing in-depth analyses of
use a multitude of different discourse-"lubricating" gambits and discourse authentic ELF interactions in different contexts as well as introspections,
strategies, and generally to provide learners with the linguistic means for where interactants' own voices can be heard. But, alas, knowledge is not
realizing their full interpersonal competence, i.e., achieve their own goals enough given the nature of language and the nature of human beings.
and remain polite. These goals can best be reached by increasing speakers' Meaning is never laid out clean and neat in any language but must
meta-pragmatic knowledge and awareness, i.e., by developing learners' be inferred, and since inferences in the fast give and take of spoken
insights into their own communicative potential-their communicative discourse tend to be quick, automatic, and fixed when they really need
strengths and deficiencies-in realizing their communicative intentions. to be slow, flexible, and readily revisable, we also need a kind of attitude
Useful activities for achieving such insights include collaborative sessions that might be characterized as "an openness of mind." To counteract
where students' taped and transcribed naturalistic or role-play interactions the damaging personal recriminations and emotional upsets in many
will be discussed, jointly interpreted, and problematized. intercultural misunderstanding events, such an openness would imply
It is important to both heighten ELF speakers' sensitivity to others' taking things more slowly, keeping them in abeyance to avoid premature
communicative needs and to enable them to formulate their own judging or prejudice. Handling misunderstanding in the classroom is of
questions and reply appropriately to questions posed by others, to realize prime importance as we are here focusing on using language in a sensitive,
their own communicative intentions in a less superficial manner, and to informed, and reflexive way.
reach a deeper understanding of others' communicative intentions. One
way of doing this is to use open role-play scenarios in which students
Teaching Activities for Developing lntercultural
interact in pairs (cf. Edmondson & House, 1981). These scenarios will
Competence in ELF
be taped and transcribed, distributed to the students, and jointly analyzed
and discussed. In particular, rich points in the interactions, cross-cultural On a practical level, I would suggest the following "types" of teaching
comparisons, and a discussion of what students may have meant but could and learning approaches for developing intercultural competence in ELF
not express the way they had intended will be a fruitful undertaking. and for making ELF users aware of misunderstandings in intercultural
As mentioned before, for such in-depth discussions of an interaction the interactions conducted in ELF:
provision of a meta-language is essential. Cognitive teaching: Here I suggest introducing students to the
For developing intercultural competence in ELF, I suggest a pragmatics importance of cognitive and meta-cognitive learning strategies,
oriented approach be given preference: in promoting knowledge about communication strategies, and a variety of reflexive activities and guided
and awareness of the functions and uses of linguistic forms, speech acts, "noticing" (on the basis of taped and transcribed interactions) in order
and speech act sequences in situated discourse, one will at the same time to increase awareness of interculturally "rich points" and to develop
foster a heightened linguistic and cultural awareness. systematic knowledge about culture- and language-conditioned differences
Third, in dealing with intercultural misunderstanding (House et al., in communicative styles and preferences that characterize the way ELF
2003) both in the classroom and outside, we must not forget to highlight speakers use the English language. As an example of such cognitive
the moral implications of what I have called "strategic misunderstandings," teaching activities I suggest students be introduced to the mechanism of
i.e., those manipulative practices found in deliberately deceitful talk, oral ELF discourse, which would imply explanations of such basic concepts
propaganda, and demagogy as well as in some types of advertising. as speech acts, discourse strategies, phases, markers, turns and moves,
Further, one should be wary of the possibility of intentionally conflictual, cross-cultural variation in realizing politeness, directness turn-taking, the
confrontational discourse, where misunderstanding seems to be built introduction and sequences of topics, and so on. As mentioned above,
into participants' communicative practices. And it is only these "strategic such an introduction to the nature of oral ELF discourse is principally
misunderstandings" which can be, and for ethical reasons should be, designed to raise students' awareness of the diversity of language use
avoided. All other types of intercultural misunderstandings can at least be underneath the apparent uniformity of the English Language. For such
attenuated in their consequences if one simply acquires more knowledge an awareness, the provision of a meta-language based on a theory of
202 Juliane House Teaching Oral Skills in English as a Lingua Franca 203

discourse and interaction is absolutely essential. There is nothing more norm, attempts to improve oral English skills should focus on interactional
practical than a good theory! phenomena and the achievement of pragmatic fluency. Phenomena handled
Process teaching: Here I recommend actively promoting students' in this chapter include awareness of ELF speakers' default recourse to their
learning process of ELF using a variety of ethnographic activities such as mother tongue in transfer and code-switching and the encouragement
asking students to keep diaries in which they are to record their persona l of the strategic employment of gambits to safeguard the flow of talk,
experiences and reflections on their learning process. On the basis of their monitor their own and others' output, and generally increase interactional
entries in these diaries, teachers can help students formulate their very own awareness and competence. This interactional pragmatic focus might well be
"subjective theories" about their individual learning routes. Further process complemented by attempts to improve intercultural competence including
activities might include asking students to engage in taking field notes and the effective handling of imminent intercultural misunderstanding via the
teacher-guided observation of ELF interactions in their environment. I also employment of a variety of different teaching approaches.
suggest teachers engage in regular personal conferencing with students to
monitor their individual learning process and progress. Exploring the Ideas
Experiential teaching: Here I suggest teachers resort to using multimedia
modules, treating intercultural misunderstandings in the medium of ELF 1 In your opinion, is there a difference between the notions of English
as "critical incidents" using simulations, scenarios, and open role plays. as an international language, World Englishes, and English as a lingua
Critical incidents should stem from learners' own personal experiences and franca? If you feel there are differences, what exactly are they, and
not pre-fabricated, stereotyped, prejudice-promoting so-called "culture how do you think they might affect teaching principles and practices?
standards." Learners' own authentic intercultural ELF interactions should 2 How important are Inner-Circle standard English norms and native
be taped, transcribed, and then collaboratively interpreted, discussed, and speakers of this norm in your particular teaching context? What in
your opinion are the differences between these Inner-Circle speakers
problematized in class.
Critical teaching: In this teaching activity teachers might encourage and speakers in Outer and Expanding Circles and in English as a
lingua franca constellations?
discussions of stereotypes and prejudices. These can be based on the
3 W hat are the major advantages of using an interactional, pragmatics­
teacher's own construction of humorous multiple choice tasks, in which
well-known (linguistic and cultural) stereotypes about particular local, discourse approach to the teaching of English as a lingua franca?
regional, and national groups of ELF speakers will be unmasked and In your opinion, how useful is an introduction to basic concepts of
satirized as human foibles. interaction and the provision of a theory-based meta-language? Do
you think it could enable students to talk about what happens in oral
Interactional sensitivity training: making learners observe general rules
of interaction by for example giving them the following advice: discourse in a more informed manner?

Applying the Ideas

• Watch out for misunderstandings.
• Use checks to immediately clarify nascent problems. 1 Research different ways of describing mechanisms of oral discourse
• Use repair strategies whenever you suspect a misunderstanding, but in your library and the Internet. Are the different approaches you
make sure to avoid loss of your own and your interlocutor's face. found equally useful for the practice of teaching in the classroom?
• Delay interpreting your interlocutor's moves as long as possible, Useful sources are Edmondson's (1981) spoken discourse model,
and be always prepared to revise your preliminary interpretations. Edmondson and House's (1981) pedagogic interactional grammar
• Be flexible and move back and forth from a micro- to a macro­ of English, as well as House's (2003b) more recent application of
perspective in your cumulative discourse interpretation. these. Try to come up with your own eclectic model which you think
• And finally: Never assume that others understand you. is most useful for your academic background, particular teaching
situation, your institution and your students!
2 Collect your own corpus of students' role-play transcriptions
Conclusion complete with your notes on the ensuing discussions. This should
Given the nature of ELF as a "plurilingual" means of communication whose enable you to come up with a profile of each student's particular
speakers do not feel the need to adhere to any native Inner-Circle English interactional strengths and weaknesses. These profiles can then be
204 Juliane House Teaching Oral Skills in English as a Lingua Franca 205

discussed with students as a means of heightening their awareness of Firth, A. (1996). The discursive accomplishment of normality on "lingua franca"
their very own oral expression potential. English and conversation analysis. Journal of Pragmatics, 26(2), 237-259.
3 Conduct a small study about intercultural misunderstanding in oral Firth, A. (2009). The lingua franca factor. lntercultural Pragmatics, 6(2), 147-170.
discourse in the medium of the English language. You might do Grosjean, F. (2001). The bilingual's language modes. In J. L. Nicol (Ed.), Language
processing in the bilingual (pp.1-22). Oxford: Blackwell.
this using a questionnaire and interviewing your students as well
J-
House, (1996). Developing pragmatic fluency in English as a foreign language.
�s asking _Your students to collect intercultural misunderstandings Routmes and metapragmatic awareness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition
m ELF usmg ethnographic observation of rich points, diaries, and 18, 225-252.
examining plays and dialogues in novels for the portrayal of one House, J. (2002). Communicating in English as a lingua franca. In S. Foster-Cohen
particularly salient intercultural misunderstanding. (Ed.), EUROSLA Yearbook 2 (pp. 234-261). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
House, J. (2003a). English as a lingua franca: A threat to multilingualism? Journal of
Sociolinguistics, 7(4), 556-578.
Note House, J. (20036). Misunderstanding in intercultural university encounters. In J.
1 This is a small special domain corpus. The biggest available source of ELF House, G. Kasper, & S. Ross (Eds.), Misunderstanding in social life: Discourse
data to date is VOICE, the Vienna Oxford International Corpus of English. approaches to problematic talk (pp. 22-56). London: Longman.
House, J. (2008). (Im)politeness in English as a lingua franca discourse. In M. Locher
& J. Straessler (Eds.), Standards and norms in the English language (pp. 351-
References 366). Berlin/NY: Mouton de Gruyter.
House, J. (2009). Subjectivity in English as lingua franca discourse: The case of you
Baumgarten, N., & House, J. (2010a). I think and I don't know in English as
know. Intercultural Pragmatics, 6(2), 171-194.
a lingua franca and native English discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(5)'
House, J. (2010). The pragmatics of English as a lingua franca. In A. Trosborg
1184-1200. _
(Ed.), Pragmatics across languages and cultures (pp. 363-390). Berlin/New York:
Baumgarten, N., & House, J. (2010b, May). Discourse markers in high-stakes ELF
Mouton de Gruyter.
academic interaction: Oral Exams. Paper presented at the 3rd International ELF
House, J., Kasper, G., & Ross, S. (Eds.). (2003). Misunderstanding in social life:
Conference, Vienna.
Discourse approaches to problematic talk. London: Longman.
Bassetti, B., & Cook, V. (2011). Relating language and cognition: The second
House, J., & Levy-Todter, M. (2010). Linguistic competence and professional
language user. In V. Cook & B. Bassetti (Eds.), Language and Bilingual Cognition _
1dent1ty m English medium institutional discourse. In B. Meyer & B. Apfelbaum
(pp. 143-190). New York: Psychology Press.
(Eds.), Multilingualism at work (pp. 13-46). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (Eds.). (1989). Cross-cultural pragmatics:
Jenkins, J. (2009). Explaining attitudes towards English as a lingua franca in the East
Requests and apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Asian context. In K. Murata & J. Jenkins (Eds.), Global English in Asian Contexts
Bygate, M. (2009). Teaching the spoken language In K. Knapp & B. Seidlhofer
(pp. 40-58). Houndsmill: Palgrave Macmillan.
(Eds.), Hand book of foreign language communication and learning (pp. 401-
Kachru, B. B. (1986). The alchemy of English. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
438). Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Meierkord, C. (1996). Englisch als Medium der Interkulturellen Kommunikation.
Cogo, A. (2009). Accommodating differences in ELF conversations: A study of
Untersuchungen zum Non-Native-Non-Native Speaker Diskurs. Frankfurt: Peter
pragmatic strategies. In A. Mauranen & E. Ranta (Eds.), English as a lingua
Lang.
franca: Studies and findings (pp. 254-273). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Press.
Polzl, U., & Seidlhofer, B. (2006). In and on their own terms: The "habitat factor"
Cogo, A., & Dewey, M. (2006). Efficiency in ELF communication: From pragmatic
in English as a lingua franca interactions. International Journal of the Sociology of
motives to lexico-grammatical innovation. Nordic Journal English Studies, 5(2),
Language 177, 151-176.
59-94.
Spielmann, D. (2007). English as lingua franca: A simplified code? (Unpublished MA
Cook, V. (1992). Linguistics and second language acquisition. New York: St. Martin's
thesis). University of Hamburg, Germany.
Press.
Wagner, J., & Firth, A. (1997). Communication strategies at work. In E. Kellerman
Crystal, D. (1997). English as a global language. Cambridge: Cambridge University
& G. Kasper (Eds.), Advances in research on communication strategies (pp. 323-
Press.
344). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Edmondson, W. J. (1981). Spoken discourse. A model for analysis. London: Longman.
Wenger, E. (1989). Communities of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Edmondson, W. J., & House, J. (1981). Let's talk and talk about it: A pedagogic
Press.
interactional grammar of English. Munich: Urban and Schwarzenberg.