To understand a little about this area, it's necessary to distinguish between two basic forms of language analysis:
Can you make a stab at the difference? Click here for an answer.
Examples may help.
In everyday life, away from the analysis of language, we are actually more interested in the function of things than the labels we put on them. For example, when faced with something that looks like this:
we would normally ask something like
Where does that door lead?
rather than
What's that?
when we hope for an answer such as
To the garden
In fact, the question What's that? when referring to a door is likely to raise an eyebrow.
In this case, asking
What's that?
would probably elicit:
What do you think it is?
On the other hand, when faced with:
then the question:
What's that?
is more legitimate and the answer you are likely to get is more informative. It might be something like:
I'm not sure. It looks like an early printing press or something.
In the classroom, especially with learners at lower levels, teachers can often be trapped into asking questions such as:
What's this?
expecting an answer:
It's a pencil
which is, of course, not an example of real communication at all because, unless one is talking to quite unusual people, it is clear to everyone what the thing in question is and all the teacher is really asking is:
Do you know the name for this in English?
and, if that really is the question, learners may be forgiven for asking:
Then why didn't you ask me that question?
It may also be the case that the teacher is encouraging the learner to demonstrate that she can use the phrase It's and follow it with a suitable determiner and noun. That is a reasonable focus on form but the exchange is still not anything like real communication.
We can, therefore analyse any piece of language two ways. Take, for example, something said such as:
My house is on the corner
We can analyse that two ways:
This simple sentence might mean a number of other things depending on who is talking to whom, where they are and what they need to communicate.
Functional approaches to teaching the language came into vogue in the 1970s and have remained to the fore ever since. More recently, there has been something of a resurgence of interest in combining formal approaches (understanding and learning structure) with communicative approaches (learning to get things done in the language). Here's a quotation from a leading theorist in the field:
. language learning is essentially learning how grammar functions in the achievement of meaning and it is a mistake to suppose otherwise.
. A communicative approach does not involve the rejection of grammar. On the contrary, it involves a recognition of its central mediating role in the use of and learning of language.
Widdowson (1990: 97/8)
The moral is that our learners need both types of information: formal, linguistic competence to make structurally correct language and communicative competence to use the language appropriately.
Ideally, many believe, lessons should combine both approaches so that learners are confident that they are getting the language right and able to see what communicative ends the language serves.
One form may have a number of functions.
Here are some examples.
| This language . | . could mean |
| The professor is writing a book | He is writing a book right this minute He is writing a book at the present time but may not be actually writing now He has arranged to write a book in the future |
| He should be there | He is obliged to be there I deduce that he is there He is advised to be there |
| It's cold in here | Please shut the window Please turn on the heating This is the reason I'm getting my coat |
| The bank is over there | That's where you can get some money That's where you can go fishing |
| convict | A noun: convict: a person in prison A verb: convict: to find someone guilty) |
You can see from these examples that one form can have more than one meaning. The form can be:
If this is true, how on earth do people ever understand each other?
Well, how do they?
Think for a minute and then see the answer.
Contextual information If we have just spoken about money or fishing, I know what you mean when you refer to a bank. Shared knowledge If you and I know that the professor is currently lecturing, we both know that you can't mean he is writing a book right now.
Lots. However, it's quite easy to find lists which include items such as
giving / getting permission
asking for and giving factual information
apologising and accepting apologies
expressing hopes and wishes
and so on.
Two key publications are from the Council of Europe and are available on the web:
Waystage 1990 by Van Ek and Trim
Threshold 1990 by Van Ek and Trim
Waystage contains a long list of functions and notions for lower levels and Threshold does the same for more advanced learners.
If you want a manageable list of 68 basic functions, there is one in the introduction to functions (new tab).
Functions often come in pairs, because one function often requires its counterpart(s). For example, asking for someone's name is a useful function to control but less so if you don't know how to respond by introducing yourself.
Here are some more adjacency pairs with examples:
| apologising | accepting or rejecting apologies |
| I'm awfully sorry Excuse me! Sorry! | That's OK Not just now No you aren't |
| asking for permission | granting or denying permission |
| May I see you for a minute? Can I ask a question? Will you let me help? | Yes, of course Wait till I have finished No |
| asking directions | giving directions |
| Can you tell me where the station is? Is this the right way to the beach? | Yes, it's at the end of the next road on the left I don't know |
and, of course, it makes sense to teach and practise them together. There's not much point in being able to ask for permission three different ways if you are unlikely to understand the response.
You may also have noticed that many functions have alternate responses:
Learners need, of course, to be able to use all three.
The other side of the coin is that we can use a number of forms to realise, i.e. perform, the same function. If I want to advise you, I can say, e.g.:
You should see a doctor
You ought to get to the doctor
Do you think it wouldn't be a good idea to see a doctor?
etc.
Here's another set of examples.
| This function . | . could be achieved by . |
| I want to tell you what he is doing sometimes but not now | He is writing a book He is engaged in writing a book He works on his book most mornings |
| I want to tell you what I've deduced | He should be there He must have arrived I'm sure he's got there by now |
| I want you to close the window | Please shut the window It's cold in here Do you think we could have the window shut? |
| I want to direct you to the bank | The bank is over there There's the bank It's over the road |
| He's in prison | He's a convict He was convicted He's been banged up He was given a custodial sentence |
If this is true, how on earth do we choose the right form to realise the function?
Well, how do we?
Think for a minute and then see the answer.
Intention Do I want to be polite, rude, deferential, explicit, vague etc.?
I can choose appropriately from:
Open the damn window!
Please open the window
I wonder if you would mind if we had the window open
Do you think we could let some air in?
etc. Context and setting How much shared information is there?
If we are standing opposite the bank, I can simply point and say
There it is.
If I know you know something of the area, I can say
It's near the pub on the corner of the park.
If you are a complete stranger, I'll have to be much more explicit and use something like
Go straight along the High Street until you see Waterstone's on your left. Take the first right after that and then you'll see the bank at the end of the street. Relationships and roles If one party is more powerful than the other (in this setting) then different language is employed.
Asking someone to sit down could take the form of
Please sit there
Sit, boy!
I wonder if I could ask you to sit here
or whatever. The medium Am I speaking or writing?
If I'm writing, is it an email or a letter?
Is this a formal lecture or a chat?
Things like this will affect the kind of language I choose.
Will I start with, Dear sir,?
Do I need to introduce myself?
etc.
Think what these might be. Try to find an implication for each of the four factors and then compare your list.
References:
Van Ek, J and Trim, J, Waystage 1990, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Van Ek, J and Trim, J, Threshold 1990, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Widdowson, H, 1990, Aspects of Language teaching, Oxford: Oxford University Press
