Humanising Language Teaching
Year 1; Issue 4; June 1999

Staying vaguely young

Julie Moore, Cambridge University Press

Page 2 of 2

The first most obvious difference is in the length of the replies. The first sample is, in fact, one of the longer stretches of speech elicited from the younger speakers. In general, their contributions were short, often just a word or a phrase or consisted of a loosely connected string of comments, mostly expressed as simple or elipted clauses. The second, however, is quite typical of the middle age range and is much longer, setting out the speaker's ideas and opinions in a relatively structured way, giving explanation and justification, linking ideas etc.

Being vague:

The second feature to really stand out is how much concrete information is given, that is, how explicit the language is. Quite clearly there is a huge difference between the very vague, inexplicit language of the younger speaker who actually conveys very little information and the far more detailed, clear, explicit language of the older speaker who makes and elaborates a number of definite points. It isn't just the actual information which is conveyed that differs either, it is the language used to express it. The younger speaker uses an extraordinary number of 'vagueness markers'; "sort of", "like", "and things like that", "and stuff". Written down in black and white, it looks almost like a parody, the stuff of the comedy writers mentioned earlier. Listening back to the recordings though (over 90 minutes from 13 different speakers in this age group), they really did speak like that, with especially the ubiquitous all-purpose marker "like" peppering the conversation of every speaker.

Similarly, looking at the range of vocabulary used by the different age groups, overall the middle-aged and older speakers used a far greater range of vocabulary, selecting words carefully according to context. The younger group, on the other hand, stuck to a narrower range of expression, often opting for the vague and the general rather than the specific. For example, looking at the group of adjectives used to express opinions and preferences, the most popular adjective in all groups was the very general "good". In the younger group, however, this accounted for 23% of all adjective choices, with the top 5 words (good, funny, cool, best, boring) making up 50% of all choices. This compares with a share of only 10% for "good" amongst the middle group, with their top 5 (good, funny, easy, interesting, clever) constituting only 26% of all such adjectives used.

Why the difference?

Although this was only a small-scale pilot study and the results are by no means conclusive, with similar patterns emerging in almost all the aspects of language usage examined, the overall trend seems hard to ignore. So why should this be the case? As I have already noted, it cannot be explained by a simple lack of linguistic competence in the young group, for whilst their range of vocabulary and ability to express themselves articulately may continue to develop into adulthood, the style adopted here was most definitely a choice, not an indication of the limit of their abilities.

A possible explanation may lie in the significance of the peer group to the younger speakers. In the somewhat narrow world of the teenage student, friends form by far the most important social contacts. Individuals want to be accepted by the group and thus adopt the appropriate linguistic norms to fit in. The most obvious sign of this is the in-group slang, but equally important is the concept of shared knowledge. Sharing the same interests and experiences is a vital part of group membership. This means that the need to express, explain and justify new ideas rarely occurs and is, in fact, even frowned upon. The role of much communication then is totally phatic, it is a means of reconfirming shared common ground, as in the following sample, which seems almost totally unintelligible to the outsider, but was, in fact, very animated and lead to fits of laughter from the group.

A: She is much nicer, I'm sorry.
C: Oh, you're blind man.
B: She's so annoying though I think, I think, she really annoys me. Like, on the radio in the morning.
C: Oh she's crap on the radio.
B: It's just, I dunno, she's sort of …
C: I think she's alright though.
B: Do you? I think, she just like, she's like a kids' presenter in everything, y'know, just …
C: Yeah but that's what she does, isn't it?
B: Yeah, but like, she doesn't all the time, she's not a kids' presenter, like, 24 hours a day so, but she acts like one.
C: But if you can get away with it, why not?

Going out into the big wide world:

Of course, once these young people leave the relatively safe world of school, college and family and have to go out into the world, they find themselves increasingly in situations where they need to communicate with people from outside the group. As they begin to deal with people with whom they do not share the same background and there is a greater social distance, they are forced to develop a more explicit style. They find the need to explain their ideas clearly, to structure an argument and to justify their opinions. And so, a more careful, explicit style becomes the norm for adult conversation.

Teaching learners to be vague?

So what implications does all of this have for the language classroom? Should we be teaching our younger students to be vague? To punctuate every sentence with "like" and to end with "and stuff like that."? No, of course not. After all, what they learn at school or college will be what they take with them into their adult life, where such forms will no longer be appropriate. Besides, how many of us would feel comfortable using some of the dialogues we saw above as the basis for a grammar lesson or giving vocab tests which included words which we ourselves would never use? And how seriously would our students take us? As Leonard Newmark points out in his wonderfully titled paper "Changing Student Pronunciation: Getting People to Eat Worms", the last thing that any teenager wants is to sound like their teacher!

Providing a realistic model:

I would like to suggest, however, that some exposure to the real language of their native speaker peers, or at least language modelled on it, accompanied by activities to raise their awareness of some of the differences that exist between speakers of different ages, could be both interesting, informative and motivating for many younger students. Providing realistic models with which they can identify would allow many students to see English as not just the preserve of rather formal, fussy grown-ups who insist on precision and accuracy, but something not so far removed from their own experience. It would also give them the opportunity to develop a more appropriate English language personality. This may not be exactly the same as their British counterparts, and why should it be? By exposure to a range of styles though, they might have a better opportunity to develop their own personal style, perhaps transferring some of the norms and ideas of their own peer group to English, or even creating totally new ones.

The search for models:

So where can you find appropriate models for young learners? Well, unfortunately, the majority of published materials are sorely lacking in anything that even vaguely approximates the features of native speaker teenagers. Whilst some course books do attempt to appeal to young learners through their choice of topics - pop music, films, sport etc. and some even throw in the odd bit of 'young vocabulary' (I've come across, for example, 'cool' and 'mates'.), much of the actual language found in dialogues and so-called 'communication activities' still exhibits many of the features more characteristic of someone in their 40s or 50s!

For those lucky enough to be able to get their hands on authentic materials from British sources, tv programmes aimed at and featuring young people (such as Grange Hill, Hollyoaks etc) might provide a source of both language input and opportunity for discussion of cultural differences - or perhaps more importantly similarities. Similarly, magazines aimed at the teen market could provide appropriate reading texts. Such 'raw' authentic materials are, of course, not available to many teachers though and require a great deal of time and effort to transform them into workable lessons.

What is really needed is more research into the whole question of age variation in language to identify more definite features, which then needs to filter down to writers and publishers in the ELT world.

You never know, it could, sort of, be the, y'know like, the basis for my next, kind of like, research project thingy and that, before I get, like, y'know, too past it and stuff …

References:

Bernstein, B. (1964) 'Elaborated and Restricted Codes: Their Social Origins and Some Consequences' in American Anthropologist 66(6)

Kay, P. (1977) 'Language Evolution and Speech Style' in Blount and Sanches (eds) Sociocultural Dimensions of Language Change New York: Academic Press

Newmark, L. (1990) 'Changing Student Pronunciation: Getting People to Eat Worms' in Scarcella, Andersen and Krashen (eds) Developing Communicative Competence in a Second Language New York: Newbury House Publishers